Thursday 27 February 2014

Credibilty Issues? Not This Blog

For years, I have been facing criticism that my blog isn't credible.  And for years, I've been answering as follows:

1) according to the polls I've read, all bloggers have credibility issues regardless of whether the authors are named or not.  Putting my name to the articles I write only detracts from the ideas that I am writing about.  By remaining unnamed, I give more focus to my words.   

2) I have a comments section on my blogs where I allow people to voice their dissenting opinions.  Few have ever challenged anything I have ever written.  I don't even rebut the comments posted.

3) and as much as I may have a credibility issue, my blogs are  better than what the public gets from the local paper.  Most people know that just because it is written with newsprint and ink, it doesn't make a story true. 

Here is an obvious case in point. 

On January 9th, 2014 I posted this blog:

I am a responsible author.  Before I wrote this blog posting, I confirmed certain things to verify the claim.  Most notably, I asked and received the incident number and the badge number of the York Region Police officer who took this report of the alleged threat. 

And despite having all of this information confirmed, the January 9th threat story was not picked up by the local papers.

But look how the local papers run front page stories about Stephen Somerville's allegations that his family was threatened.  If this "anonymous blogger can check sources, then surely the local papers could have at least pressed Stephen Somerville to produce an incident number and a York Regional Police officer badge number? 

Why do the local papers continue to fall well below the professional standards of so-called anonymous bloggers?   

Tuesday 18 February 2014

Impeccable Source? Not Really.

Regular readers of mine already know that when it comes to writing this blog, I would actually prefer to be doing other things.  I keep hoping that there will be a day (soon) when my blog will no longer be necessary.  I sincerely believe that it is the job of the local media to report and comment on the "news".  Unfortunately, our own local media hasn't lived up to the standards of it's profession so my blog lives on serving the community by providing another perspective on Newmarket municipal government. 

Here is an item of news that should really surprise no one:  the blog "Shrink Slessor Square" is now bragging about its so-called impeccable source for all the latest gossip and innuendo - and it appears to be a member of the local media.

According to the most recent blog post dated February 16, 2014, Councillor Di Muccio was recently interviewed by "local journalists" and it would seem that one of them passed along the juiciest morsels of gossip to gassified windbag, Gordon Prentice. 

To Prentice's so-called impeccable 'source', I say: false profession, deceitfulness, and hypocrisy.

Never mind the lack of morals displayed by someone who is receiving a salary from his/her employer to carry on as a 'source' for the blogger.

Never mind the professional standards and ethics of journalism which this so-called 'source' has failed to honour.

Never mind how this 'source' has sullied the reputations of his/her colleagues who work hard and with integrity in their pursuit of journalistic excellence.

Local news has been replaced by back-fence chatter. 

I can't say I am surprised.  I certainly didn't expect anything better from our local media or from blogs like, "Shrink Slessor Square."

"Cluck, cluck, cluck," goes the hen named Gordon.  

Tuesday 11 February 2014

Ward 1's Wheelman?

There is an old saying that a friend will help you move but a true friend is someone who will help you move a body.

If that is the case, what are the reactions of residents living in Newmarket's Ward 1 to this story?  Click here

I acknowledge that there is a chance that the "get away driver" coincidentally has the same name as the Newmarket Ward 1 candidate.  But if the person referenced in the Court's statement of facts is Ward 1's hopeful, then the candidate owes the people of Newmarket a full account of his actions.

Helping murderers escape justice by squirreling them out of the country?

That's not something that can be easily explained or forgiven.

Thursday 6 February 2014

Newmarket's "Seinfeld" Election

The Liberal Party of Newmarket-Aurora was out in full force yesterday (with balloons) to launch Tony Van Bynen's re-election bid.  Yawn. 

In fact, "Yawn" could summarize the entire Newmarket 2014 Election campaign up until now.

Incumbents who have announced their re-election bid are doing their very best to avoid any conversation about any issues. 

In fact, reading the Era reporting on Council, it seems that all this Council intends to do between now and election day is defer all business to 2015's council.  I don't know why we pay these folks for a four year term when they only seem willing to work for three years. 

And those running to replace an incumbent are no better. 

Many of them were at Tony Van Bynen's party last night, giving their unqualified support to Tony's 7 years of consecutive tax increases.  (I wonder how that will look on an election brochure). 

I watch these newbies and I don't see anything that makes me hopeful.  So far, the most spirited debate seems to be which one of them shovels their sidewalk the best. 

How about speaking about matters that will improve the Town and the lives of its residents?

The only person who is still focused on the job is the one council member who won't likely be part of this Council in 2015.  Councillor Di Muccio's blog on sports fees was excellent and exactly the kind of debate I'd like to see council focused on.  While happy that she has a new opportunity, it's too bad that she'll be running for the PC Party instead of returning to Council next term. 

As for the rest, the starter's gun fired about a month ago.  The race has begun.  When are these people going to act like there's a race going on?